From: stephen@sprunk.org   
      
   On 10-Apr-15 15:21, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   > On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 9:54:00 AM UTC-4, Clark F Morris wrote:   
   >> Given that SEPTA needs to upgrade to high level platforms for ADA   
   >> and performance reasons, this could make a lot of sense.   
   >   
   > SEPTA does NOT need to upgrade to high level platforms for ADA.  A   
   > small mini platform is all that is needed, which is much cheaper to   
   > build.   
      
   A mini high block requires bridge plates if it's not going to conflict   
   with freight trains, and that slows boarding--and unpredictably so,   
   which is worse.   
      
   > High level would not significantly improve SEPTA times as the   
   > passenger count at an individual station isn't that high.   
      
   With a mix of platform heights, the crew still has to operate the doors   
   and traps, which adds time to every stop.  It also increases labor   
   costs--money that should be invested into capital improvements.   
      
   > Further, high level paltforms get out of alignment (visit Princeton   
   > Jct) and cease being an improvement.   
      
   That some operators are incompetent does not prove the idea bad.   
      
   S   
      
   --   
   Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein   
   CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the   
   K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)